Editor:

I am writing in reply to Dean Mosher’s column published in the April 29 Fairhope Courier. Dean’s letter brings added attention to questions that Paul F. Ripp and I have continually raised since September 2008. Specifically, we have sought to understand why the Publix project has received preferential treatment, or favoritism, from the city toward the enforcement of its many noted buffer, tree, public safety and environmental ordinance violations.

Will the developers at Publix be forced to pay fines and remediation that other developers paid for being in violation of city ordinances? It seems that if they do not then the Dyas Lawsuit, which alleges “favoritism,” will be all but proven — out of court. The City Council’s silence related to Publix is now explained. To admit wrongdoing at Publix would only corroborate the lawsuit.

Maybe it is time for the city to come clean, admit it is wrong and settle the Dyas lawsuit so taxpayers can begin to save some of their $70,000-per-month that goes to legal fees. The lawsuit is scheduled to be in court later this year. Perhaps they would consider a settlement that is fair and would save the city further embarrassment and money, which it apparently needs during these dire economic times.

The next big thing coming down the pike is the all-important certificate of occupancy for Publix that must be signed by Mayor Kant, Jennifer Fidler and Barry Fulford. Without this important document, Publix cannot occupy its building and begin selling groceries. However, Kant has on at least three occasions — twice in planning commission meetings and once on television — said he “will not issue a certificate of occupancy at Publix if there are problems.”

The Publix project in many ways is a microcosm of the way our city handles its public affairs. If there is little to no accountability from our government for this project that has already spawned one federal lawsuit from the Fly Creek Preservation Association, why should we believe that we do not need a forensic audit to settle our financial situation? Moreover, why would any council member oppose a one-time fee to conduct an audit when they continue to say nothing about the city’s top-heavy salary schedule and ongoing exorbitant monthly legal fees? At this juncture, Dean Mosher is right, a forensic, third-party audit is long overdue as it will certainly shed a bright, much-needed light on the city’s perplexing financial situation.

Fairhope